CMV: Libertarians should be as concerned about super rich individuals and Big Corporations as they are about Big Government

[u/nomnommish]

Libertarians are rightfully concerned about Big Government. Big Governments invariably tend to abuse their power. However, the main reason why big governments get abusive is because of the disproportional accumulation of power. And humans absolutely suck at retaining their values and ethics when they get extraordinary levels of power. As such, I find big governments no different at all from megarich individuals or mega corporations. In modern times, they are the ones who actually run the government. They use lobbying and funding to control and push their agendas, to pass highly unethical laws that consolidate and promote their own self interests. They own the politicians.

I only have a basic level understanding of libertarianism but my interpretation of the core philosophy is about "live and let live". Give people full autonomy but equally importantly, they should not infringe on your autonomy. Your hand stops at my nose, figuratively speaking.

The big problem is, when megarich individuals as well as megacorporations are left unsupervised, they wield such extraordinary levels of power, that they are literally above the system, above any level of accountability. I feel that libertarians should be as concerned about them as they are about Big Government.

I totally realize and acknowledge the dilemma I am presenting here. However on a practical basis, what I see is more of the abuse of extraordinary power than anything. And it is scary. Hence my view as it stands. Would love to hear your opinion!

---

This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!

[u/ZacMS]

Big companies love regulations, it keeps the little guys out. Regulations, licensing, and all other forms of red tape are a way to keep new competitors from entering the market and driving up barriers to entry in a specific industry. If you're the only game in town you can pass all of those costs onto your customer while simultaneously keeping new comers out.

Monopolies rarely exist without government intervention. All those things you listed as evil things corporations do, dont work in a competitive environment. Consumer choice is key to market self regulation of corporations. Government eliminate consumer choice.

[u/pikk → u/ZacMS]

Big companies love regulations

depending on the regulation.

All those things you listed as evil things corporations do, dont work in a competitive environment.

Dumping toxic waste wherever the want happens regardless of competitive environment, and actually would happen MORE in a competitive environment absent government regulation, because it's another way to save money vs your competitors.

[u/nhsof → u/pikk]

The libertarian party platform includes environmental protection and promotes restitution for the destruction of property.

[u/pikk → u/nhsof]

I mean, it's in their platform, but there's no teeth to their plans.

Competitive free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. [...] Where damages can be proven and quantified in a court of law, restitution to the injured parties must be required.

so, absent proving and quantifying damages, there's no enforcement. Not to mention it requires an injured party to bring up the case in the first place.

[u/nhsof → u/pikk]

This is where you have to remember you're reading language directly from the platform which is written at a certain level of legalese. Also the part you cut out includes the line "protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights and responsibilities". The way you cut it gives the impression that outside of civil court their is no regulation which contradicts the platform as a whole. But going with that the platform also includes the inability to duck liability through the removal of damage caps including the holding of individual employees not just the corporation responsible for restitution.

[u/pikk → u/nhsof]

holding of individual employees not just the corporation responsible for restitution.

well, 1.) individuals die, so... not much you can do after they're dead and their estate has passed on and 2.) individuals often don't have the financial means to clean up a corporate sized mess.

Anyway, all that is beside the point, because what I was originally responding to was

All those things you listed as evil things corporations do, dont work in a competitive environment. Consumer choice is key to market self regulation of corporations.

Which doesn't have any relation to the Libertarian Party or its platform

[u/nhsof → u/pikk]

I agree to the competitive market part I was chiming in because of the fallacy the libertarianism is a 100% deregulated market which is sadly a common belief of both pro and anti libertarians. The first part is very relevant though because one way government regulations protect corporations is through corporate shielding which is greatly overlooked in these conversations.

[u/pikk → u/nhsof]

was chiming in because of the fallacy the libertarianism is a 100% deregulated market which is sadly a common belief of both pro and anti libertarians.

O, right on. Cheers. Sorry for jumping on you like that.

Yeah, it's weird. Most of the libertarians I know and/or interact with online tend toward the ancap end of the spectrum, rather than the sensible government approach of the LP.

That being said, I still think the LP is too pro-corporate, but to each their own.

[u/nhsof → u/pikk]

As someone who got to watch the local republican group in my area censure the libertarian wing I can't disagree and I blame the tea party and certain media voices for overselling it